Apple Vision Pro Customer Interest Dying Down at Some Retail Stores

[Surf Monkey]

I think if they treat it like a niche product for specific use-cases instead of a general computing device for everyone, they can make it work.

Apple is a consumer electronics company. They want it to be a general computing device, not a niche product.

They could pivot to make it a gaming/media device (and buy a gaming company to produce the games for it),

Media to the extent that they want to lock you into Disney content, sure. But gaming? Never. Apple doesn’t understand gaming and never has.

or make a version that just functions as a external monitor for a Mac.

I mean, that’s kind of what it is already.

In my opinion, it's the whole "spatial computing" angle they are pushing that is the main problem.

Because they want it to be a consumer device. A general computing consumer device. They make glancing efforts to suggest B2B deployment but they’re clearly not serious about that market. They want the same people who buy iPhones to buy it. But that isn’t going to happen.

 

[MechaVice]

If they want normal consumers to adopt it, gaming/recreation is key. Specifically, recreational experiences unique to these types of headsets, not just a TV strapped to one's head. Let's face it, this is not going to be a big productivity tool. They can sell VR/AR gaming and experiences to a lot more people than they can the notion that the AVP is as good as or better than a computer for spreadsheets, word processing, email, web browsing, etc. It's like Apple saw the SNL "Virtual Reality Book System" from 1995 and didn't get the joke.

There are various niche uses for it that only apply to a small number of people's peculiar outlier situations and tastes. Tech companies want to sell us on some new paradigm every few years, but sometimes people just like the old ways better. Remember when video calls were considered cool and futuristic? Our cell phones have been capable of that for years, but text messages and phone calls are still king. How many video calls do you make that aren't work-related Zoom calls? For most people, probably not many.

A lot of people would be interested to use VR/AR for a short time once in a blue moon, at a VR arcade or a museum or something. I did a VR Star Wars thing at a place called The Void a few years ago, which was well done and a lot of fun. They closed their locations due to the pandemic, but apparently it was pretty expensive to run, so who knows if they would have survived even without a pandemic. Sandbox VR is still around, though I don't know it compares.

 

[doelcm82]

Well, I’d happily provide some examples of Apple products that were allowed to fester and die over several generations when an instant cancel would have been a better choice. But again, I’m just speculating like everyone else and not especially invested in this particular point. The over arching point is more important: Vision failed. Badly and dramatically.

Ah, so this is the point that you really care about. The one you're invested in. The one you have to be right about.

I disagree on this one, too. I think Apple is going to continue to work toward a lighter, more comfortable version of Apple Vision that they can manufacture and market at a lower cost and price. And they'll continue to improve Vision OS and the App Store.

I know there are a lot of people saying "I'm not going to strap something on my face ever." They'll have to change their mind on something fundamental before Apple can market to them. But there are a lot of people saying "I'd buy it if cost less" or "I'd buy it if it could do X". Those are problems that can be fixed with software and new hardware versions. That's a market Apple can tap into.

I am invested in the future of Apple Vision, but even if Apple does decide the market is not worth pursuing, I'm going to enjoy mine as long as it's supported. And in a future where mixed reality has been totally abandoned, I'll remember my time with Apple Vision Pro fondly, and feel sorry for everyone who missed out on the experience.

 

[its93rc]

I love mine but it is not too practical. I hate typing on it, for instance and the FOV is mediocre. Nonetheless, I enjoy it but it is nowhere near prime-time.

 

[Surf Monkey]

Ah, so this is the point that you really care about. The one you're invested in. The one you have to be right about.

I disagree on this one, too. I think Apple is going to continue to work toward a lighter, more comfortable version of Apple Vision that they can manufacture and market at a lower cost and price. And they'll continue to improve Vision OS and the App Store.

I know there are a lot of people saying "I'm not going to strap something on my face ever." They'll have to change their mind on something fundamental before Apple can market to them. But there are a lot of people saying "I'd buy it if cost less" or "I'd buy it if it could do X". Those are problems that can be fixed with software and new hardware versions. That's a market Apple can tap into.

I am invested in the future of Apple Vision, but even if Apple does decide the market is not worth pursuing, I'm going to enjoy mine as long as it's supported. And in a future where mixed reality has been totally abandoned, I'll remember my time with Apple Vision Pro fondly, and feel sorry for everyone who missed out on the experience.

It appears YOU were the one with the hidden agenda. Doing a 180 at the end of your commentary is amusing at least.

And no, I don’t “have to be right” about it. That accusation is pure fabrication on your part.

 

[Veraxus]

So, something that can be fixed/implemented with a software update?

Ostensibly. Prevailing theory is that Apple has intentionally throttled some of that functionality to keep the device from getting uncomfortably warm. If that really is the case then it's something they could fix, but probably won't.

 

[Veraxus]

I am still interested in buying an AVP. However, I recently went in to my local apple store to find out if I could watch a couple of 360° videos I shot with my Insta360 One X camera that are posted on YouTube. They told me they're not allowed to deviate from the scripted demo and in order to watch them I would have to buy an AVP. They said I could always return it within two weeks if I didn't like it. I guess I will have to wait until I can find out for sure how good Insta360 One X videos look on the AVP.

I can answer that for you. They look bad.

The AVP's image quality is so extremely high that you need to shoot 8K to present a decent 180 video. If you are doing 3D on top of that, then you need 8K per eye. 5.7K at 360 will look really bad on the AVP.

 

[UK-MacAddict]

I think if they treat it like a niche product for specific use-cases instead of a general computing device for everyone, they can make it work. They could pivot to make it a gaming/media device (and buy a gaming company to produce the games for it), or make a version that just functions as a external monitor for a Mac.

In my opinion, it's the whole "spatial computing" angle they are pushing that is the main problem.

Even in gaming VR headsets have been a failure. PSVR2 isn't selling well.

The only way VR/AR will ever be mainstream and truly take off is either its on a contact lens or its a setup like the holodeck from Star Trek and the latter is a billion miles away from current tech lol.

 

[UK-MacAddict]

I think it's time for Tim Cook to step aside now and let someone else take over. He has single handedly ruined the Apple we all loved under Steve Jobs. He should go back to his inventory control job.

 

[DeepWebinar]

I think that this product is too intimidating to the average consumer.

yeah gotta be that, couldn’t possibly be a problem with the product. apple just needs to release better consumers and this thing will be a huge hit

 

[MechaVice]

yeah gotta be that, couldn’t possibly be a problem with the product. apple just needs to release better consumers and this thing will be a huge hit

 

[irj]

Apple Vision Pro, Apple's $3,500 spatial computing device, appears to be following a pattern familiar to the AR/VR headset industry – initial enthusiasm giving way to a significant dip in sustained interest and usage.

Since its debut in the U.S. in February 2024, excitement for the Apple Vision Pro has noticeably cooled, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. Writing in his latest Power On newsletter, Gurman reports a marked decline in the demand for retail demos and sales, based on the Apple Stores he has spoken to:
The trend that Apple Vision Pro appears to be following is less likely to be a retail anomaly, and more indicative of a broader issue that has plagued VR technology from its inception: Maintaining user engagement after the initial novelty wears off.

Gurman offers his personal experience of Apple's headset as a microcosm of what he suspects is a wider user trend. His own usage has decreased from daily interactions to just once or twice a week. A significant barrier to more frequent use, he says, is a setup that involves attaching batteries, booting up, and navigating a complex interface, which makes traditional devices like laptops and smartphones more appealing for regular tasks.

Gurman also blames the Vision Pro's lack of a "killer app" and compelling content for further diminishing the headset's appeal. He notes that it feels better suited to solitary activities – say, on a long flight or while working from home – rather than for use in social situations or around co-workers.

It seems Apple still has a considerable task ahead in evolving the Vision Pro into a device that redefines everyday technology use. In the meantime, several bugs that initially plagued visionOS have been resolved, although many of Apple's own apps are still not optimized for the device's operating system.

In the last visionOS update, Apple added Spatial Personas, which make it feel like you are in the same virtual room as another Vision Pro user. Spatial Personas can be used for watching movies and TV shows together, FaceTime and other video calls, using apps like Freeform, playing games, and more. However, the feature needs other Vision Pro owners to appreciate it, and as Gurman notes, they are still few and far between.

Apple is expected to produce fewer than 400,000 Vision Pro headsets in 2024 due to the complexity of manufacturing, according to analyst Ming-Chi Kuo. However, Apple is said to be already working on a new version of the Apple Vision Pro for 2025 that will be priced more affordably. Meanwhile, the first incarnation of the headset is expected to arrive in additional countries later this year.

Article Link: Apple Vision Pro Customer Interest Dying Down at Some Retail Stores

I would be amazed if Apple didn't expect this. From the beginning I believed that the price-point put the Vision Pro in an almost unique category... Too expensive to go mass-market, but easily within reach of businesses and some early-adopters who want to experience Apple's take on VR. They will almost certainly have known that the $3,500 price tag would put it beyond reach for many, particularly for a technology which, outside of gaming, is still incredibly niche.

I see the AVP as almost a proof-of-concept of what Apple can do in the VR space. It gives people a chance, through Apple stores, online reviews and word-of-mouth, to see the potential of the technology. This, in turn, generates an incentive and highlights markets for developers to create those much-needed killer apps.

If the AVP provides a platform on which those killer apps can be imagined and realised, much more widely than sending out devkits to select partners ever could, I expect Apple's next major move will be to release a slightly more refined, less expensive, albeit probably vastly pared down successor.

Yes. When it was announced it was clear it was not meant to be a blockbuster profit machine but an exploration. We all know but it sometimes helps to say that Apple is one of the few companies that can develop something for five or ten years and then cancel it and the lost billions are trivial (cough cough apple car). In this case they almost certainly have a road map that has 3–4 iterations planned before they call it good and stop throwing money at it and that also will not hurt them. And it might turn into a big thing.

I was never interested in this but happened to walk by the store in DTLA and on a whim scheduled a demo. I'm still a "never buy" unless it was like $750, just my personal pain threshold, but the demo was seriously impressive—maybe most of all the clips that were recorded with its built in cameras and mics and played back. I don't know if other sets do this but the implications were interesting to say the least. Reasonably close to Strange Days/Brainstorm territory.

 

[Jetscreamer]

Is the sticker shock. Only Tech Bros bought these things to brag about being on the bleeding edge of technology.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Guys

It’s done.

 

[tornadowrangler]

Even in gaming VR headsets have been a failure. PSVR2 isn't selling well.

The only way VR/AR will ever be mainstream and truly take off is either its on a contact lens or its a setup like the holodeck from Star Trek and the latter is a billion miles away from current tech lol.

Didn't say it would ever be mainstream, I said as a niche product.

 

[Surf Monkey]

Didn't say it would ever be mainstream, I said as a niche product.

Which means it already failed since Apple doesn’t cater to niche markets.

 

[Odan]

I'm on the fence about buying one when it's released in Europe, however the discomfort reports are concerning. I don't use the iPad more than 2-3 hours a day realistically so I was looking at it as a fancy iPad for consuming media. Apparently it's no good at YouTube and from what I read in the infuse forums, their app is nowhere near ready. Infuse is great on the iPad and plays everything well from the NAS, just like the Apple TV. If you cannot watch decent video or movies, I don't see the point... to be fair the competition isn't great at this either. Maybe it's just too soon for most people... The PS VR2 looks good for PS5 games like Gran Truism 7 but it would be great if one VR headset could do it all. Or at least if I could use a Vision Pro with steam eventually... give us more use cases and it will be more appealing. Maybe I should wait for gen 2 if the apps are just not there yet?

Going back to my lack of use for the Vision Pro other than movies, I found out that the Quest 3 works quite nicely with certain steam games and has a better app for playing your own library of movies rather than stream Netflix or Apple stuff, which is what I do With infuse on the iPad and Apple TV... I could buy a Quest 3 and PS VR2 combined for less than a Vision Pro and much more utility in both cases, especially with the quest 3.

The biggest downside is paying suckerburg for that device and being out of the Apple ecosystem. Unfortunately the Vision Pro is very limited in use to me right now and Apple dismisses better gaming platforms like steam far too much… if the Vision Pro is so powerful, why not make it work with steam games? it pains me to say it as an Apple fan but the quest 3 could potentially do more for me… it’ll depend on its performance and reliability as well.

 

[spinedoc77]

Your eyes are basically your brain sticking out of the front of your face. The idea that putting electronics directly on them is a good thing? Wow. No. Not only is it completely unrealistic but the chances of such a thing ever passing regulatory approval are slim to none.

Not only is it completely realistic but a company (probably more than one I bet) were specifically working on FDA approval. Although that's 2 years ago and from what I understand they put the contact lens on hold, not because it wasn't feasible, but because the micro-LED display technology they invented turned out to be much more valuable in other applications, purportedly some for government purposes. But the technology is there, I'll bet the government lured the technology away with a lucrative contract. I believe funding during the pandemic was also an issue in their sidelining the project. Hopefully we at least see this in glasses as it's the most dense micro-LED display around, they have tested displays with 28,000 PPI! But in this case the sidelining wasn't due to the technology, but rather to finances.

Anyway I highly disagree, but as usual simply my personal opinion (as yours is your personal opinion). These would sell like hotcakes if the human trials and FDA certification were there.

 

[spinedoc77]

That sounds hard to believe. What do you mean by very close?

See above, although as stated that was based on 2 years ago. Nowadays probably not that close anymore. We'll probably see some really lightweight glasses much sooner and I'm good with that for now.

Edit: Just had to add the demo video, really amazing technology. 14,000 PPI, eye tracking which is so good you can just select stuff and drive the UI with your eyes only, unlimited FOV, has it's own battery, radio, etc. It's also very interesting to note the reasoning why it's not much of a stretch to imagine these approved by the FDA, the circuitry is sandwiched inside a medical grade contact lens already used for the past 20 years. Hopefully the technology pops up again.

 

[Surf Monkey]

Not only is it completely realistic but a company (probably more than one I bet) were specifically working on FDA approval. Although that's 2 years ago and from what I understand they put the contact lens on hold, not because it wasn't feasible, but because the micro-LED display technology they invented turned out to be much more valuable in other applications, purportedly some for government purposes. But the technology is there, I'll bet the government lured the technology away with a lucrative contract. I believe funding during the pandemic was also an issue in their sidelining the project. Hopefully we at least see this in glasses as it's the most dense micro-LED display around, they have tested displays with 28,000 PPI! But in this case the sidelining wasn't due to the technology, but rather to finances.

Anyway I highly disagree, but as usual simply my personal opinion (as yours is your personal opinion). These would sell like hotcakes if the human trials and FDA certification were there.

It’s a stupid idea.

 

[Surf Monkey]

See above, although as stated that was based on 2 years ago. Nowadays probably not that close anymore. We'll probably see some really lightweight glasses much sooner and I'm good with that for now.

Edit: Just had to add the demo video, really amazing technology. 14,000 PPI, eye tracking which is so good you can just select stuff and drive the UI with your eyes only, unlimited FOV, has it's own battery, radio, etc. It's also very interesting to note the reasoning why it's not much of a stretch to imagine these approved by the FDA, the circuitry is sandwiched inside a medical grade contact lens already used for the past 20 years. Hopefully the technology pops up again.

Utterly idiotic. Just wait until a battery explodes and ruins someone’s eye.

 

[MechaVice]

If that lens was a medical device for vision-impaired people, that worked beyond eye problems that glasses and normal contacts help with, I could see it being useful (no pun intended). Otherwise, I'm not exactly jumping at the chance to put electronics directly on my eyes.

 

[Ben11]

I’m not surprised!!

 

[vantelimus]

I love mine but it is not too practical. I hate typing on it, for instance and the FOV is mediocre. Nonetheless, I enjoy it but it is nowhere near prime-time.

Get an external keyboard. My use of the AVP has gone up tremendously since doing that.

Use it for displaying your laptop or desktop screen. If you are concentrating most of your attention on an app that only runs on your desktop and it fits comfortably on one screen, then the AVP is an excellent monitor. You can have a large (AVP) display for your main task and AVP windows for all the ancillary apps you use to support your main task (i.e Safari, Messages, Slack, Numbers, Word, etc.).

It turns out to be very practical if you approach it the way an early technology adopter does: you find ways on your own to integrate it into a new solution. You'll be lost if you are actually an early mainstream adopter, who buys already worked out solutions, not technology.

 

[Steve Expat]

The only users that currently understand Vision Pro are film makers, maybe some composers and perhaps some game developers. Spatial Audio‘s success is somewhat tied to the success of Atmos. Not completely, but if Atmos ever enters the home, then that’s even better for Spatial Audio. For those of you that don’t know, almost every DAW (digital audio workstation) now supports Atmos. That doesn't happen unless developers feel that if they don’t include Atmos support that they’ll be seen as behind. DAW developers tend to only support sure bets. Spatial Audio is basically just a binaural mix of Atmos, (in very general term).

Most users don‘t see past the demos that come with the VP. That’s ok. They’re not content creators, so they‘re not going to have a, eh, vision for the device. It’s going to take the high end content creators, professionals not YouTubers, to make VP a success. But this will take time. There wasn’t much use for the iPad when it came out. It was a big iPhone with not much software. It turned out to be a movie watching device for kids until 2015 when the first Pro came out. The VP is much more niche than the iPad Pro. But, if Apple keeps improving it, offering cheaper versions, (maybe, not so sure about that one), and professionals create content for it, which in turn should create applications for it, then it will catch on.

I’m a composer for film, TV and video games, and I can’t wait to get my hands on a Vision Pro. I’ve demoed one, but I must own one. Finally, I can leave the desk environment and have big screens anywhere I want. I first experienced this when I bought the 1st Gen iPad Pro. I used Notion iOS to compose film scores in the park, at the sound stage, at orchestra rehearsal, and anywhere I went. Now I can do this again at a much much large scale. This is very exciting indeed!

You all will see. If enough of us get this devise and it becomes an everyday part of our workflow, the VP will succeed, because it will trickle down to everyone else once we build exciting content that everyone wants. It’s the “killer app” syndrome yet again. But the killer app in this case is the amount of outstanding content that will make users realize that they’ll want to spend $3000 for this device, (I’m assuming a price drop). It may seem like a hard sell, but to me it seems like a given that the VP should succeed.

Obviously, I could be wrong. If so, hopefully I won’t be the creep who takes 3D videos at people‘s birthdays. 😬